When Human Beings Declare Spiritual Bankruptcy by Saying, “We Cannot Save Ourselves,” God Performs the Miracle of Salvation by Passing Camel-Like Sinners Through the Eye of a Needle

 

When Human Beings Declare Spiritual Bankruptcy by Saying, “We Cannot Save Ourselves,” God Performs the Miracle of Salvation by Passing Camel-Like Sinners Through the Eye of a Needle

 

 

 

 

“Jesus looked at him and said, ‘How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!  For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.’  Those who heard it said, ‘Then who can be saved?’  But He said, ‘The things that are impossible with men are possible with God’” (Luke 18:24–27).

 

 

(1)    As I read today’s passage, Luke 18:24–27, first in the Korean Bible and then in the Greek New Testament, the very first thing that caught my attention was the phrase “ὁ Ἰησοῦς [περίλυπον γενόμενον]” (ho Iēsous [perilypon genomenon]), which is not translated in the Korean Bible.  What does this expression mean, and why was it omitted from the Korean translation?

 

1.       Analysis of the Meaning of the Phrase

 

This expression consists of two parts and literally means the following:

 

“ὁ Ἰησοῦς” (ho Iēsous): “Jesus” (the subject)

 

“περίλυπον γενόμενον” (perilypon genomenon): “being deeply grieved,” “becoming exceedingly sorrowful,” or “while filled with grief” (a participial phrase)

 

The adjective “περίλυπος” (perilypos) is formed by combining περί (peri, “around” or “surrounding”) with λύπη (lypē, “sorrow” or “grief”). It vividly describes a person who is surrounded on every side by sorrow, overwhelmed with intense grief and anguish.

 

Thus, a fully literal rendering of the phrase would be: “Jesus, seeing him [being very sorrowful / or while Himself being deeply grieved], said…”

 

2.       Why Is It Not Translated in the Korean Bible? — A Matter of Textual Criticism

 

The essential background to my question for artificial intelligence concerns the differences among biblical manuscripts.  Since the printing press did not exist in the ancient world, every copy of the Scriptures had to be copied by hand. Consequently, some manuscripts contain words or phrases that others do not.

 

①      Textual Criticism and the Meaning of the Brackets [...]

 

In modern critical editions of the Greek New Testament (such as the Nestle-Aland 28th Edition), when a phrase is enclosed in brackets [...], it indicates that some important ancient manuscripts include the phrase while other equally important manuscripts omit it.  In other words, scholars regard its originality as uncertain and therefore mark it for careful consideration.

 

②      Differences Among Manuscript Families

 

Manuscript Family Without the Phrase (the textual basis for the Korean Revised Version and New Korean Translation): The oldest and generally most reliable manuscripts—such as the Codex Sinaiticus (ℵ), Codex Vaticanus (B), and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)—do not contain the phrase περίλυπον γενόμενον (“being deeply grieved”).  Because modern Korean translations primarily follow these earlier manuscripts, they simply translate the verse: “Jesus looked at him and said…”

 

Manuscript Family With the Phrase (the basis for the Common Translation and the King James Version): Other manuscripts, including Codex Alexandrinus (A), Codex Bezae (D), and many later Byzantine manuscripts, do contain this expression.  The Textus Receptus, used during the Protestant Reformation and followed by the King James Version (KJV), therefore translates: “And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful...”  Among Korean versions, the Common Translation, which adopts a somewhat broader manuscript tradition, similarly renders: “When Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, He said...”

 

3.       The Profound Meditation Arising from the Grammatical Ambiguity: Who Was Sorrowful?

 

Even if we assume that the Greek phrase περίλυπον γενόμενον (“being deeply grieved”) originally belonged to the text, the grammatical structure allows two legitimate interpretations, creating a challenge for translators.  The participle is in the masculine singular accusative, making either reading grammatically possible.

 

Interpretation A: The Rich Ruler Was Sorrowful (Traditional Interpretation)

 

Verse 23 already states that the rich ruler became deeply sorrowful because he was extremely wealthy.  Accordingly, verse 24 may simply mean that Jesus saw the ruler in his profound sorrow before speaking.  This is the understanding reflected in the KJV and the Korean Common Translation.

 

Interpretation B: Jesus Himself Was Sorrowful (A Deeper Spiritual Interpretation)

 

Some scholars understand the participle as modifying the main subject, Jesus.  In this reading, Jesus looked upon the young ruler who was walking away from eternal life because of his attachment to wealth, and Jesus Himself was overwhelmed with grief, His heart breaking as He watched the young man reject the invitation to follow Him.

 

In summary, the Korean Revised Version omits this phrase because it follows the oldest and clearest manuscript tradition.  Its omission is therefore not a translation mistake or careless omission but the result of careful scholarly textual criticism.

 

(a)    As I meditate on these two interpretations (Interpretations A and B), I find Interpretation A especially fascinating.  If Interpretation A is correct, then the rich ruler became "deeply sorrowful" in verse 23, and in verse 24 Jesus saw him being "very sorrowful."  What especially interests me is that the Greek word translated "deeply sorrowful" in verse 23 is “περίλυπος” (perilypos), while the word translated "very sorrowful" in verse 24 is “περίλυπον” (perilypon).  This is significant because both forms are derived from the same adjective:  περίλυπος (perilypos).  Their different appearances are simply due to their different grammatical functions (gender, number, and case) within the sentence.  When these two verses are read together in Greek, the literary beauty of the passage and the consistency of Luke's message become even more striking.  The grammatical features of Greek provide rich material for meditation.

 

a.       The Grammatical Identity of the Two Words

 

Both words derive from the adjective περίλυπος, which describes someone surrounded on every side (περί-) by sorrow and grief (λύπη).

 

Verse 23: “περίλυπος”

 

                                      Grammar: Masculine singular nominative.

 

Structure: Since the subject is the rich ruler (he), the predicate adjective also appears in the nominative.

 

                                      The meaning is: "He became deeply sorrowful."

 

Verse 24: “περίλυπον”

 

                                      Grammar: Masculine singular accusative.

 

  Structure: If Interpretation A is adopted, the adjective modifies "him" (αὐτόν), the direct object whom Jesus saw.  Accordingly, it changes into the accusative form to agree with its noun.

 

b.       Why Is This Discovery So Fascinating? (Meditation Point)

Scholars who support Interpretation A often regard precisely this linguistic consistency and symmetry as one of its strongest arguments.  This symmetry is probably not accidental but a deliberate literary and theological device employed by Luke.

 

①      The Transfer of Sorrow and the Meeting of Two Gazes

 

In verse 23, after hearing Jesus' command, the young ruler was overwhelmed by such intense sorrow (περίλυπος) that he likely lowered his head or his facial expression changed dramatically.

 

Then, in verse 24, Jesus looked directly at the very same sorrow (περίλυπον) that had settled over the young man's face and entire being.  The verb Ἰδών ("having seen," "looking intently") suggests that Jesus carefully observed him. 

 

The frequency of sorrow hidden within the young man's heart was perfectly discerned by Jesus.  Luke's repetition of the same adjective creates what might be called vivid cinematic camera work—a literary technique in which the reader's perspective shifts seamlessly from the young man's inner anguish to Jesus' compassionate gaze, almost as though the camera itself were alive and following the emotional movement of the scene.

 

②      The Contrast Between Material Abundance and Spiritual Poverty

 

The ruler's wealth (χρήματα) surrounded him with luxury, comfort, and security.  Yet when confronted with the question of eternal life, he found himself surrounded not by riches but by sorrow (περίλυπος).  By placing the same adjective in consecutive verses, Luke powerfully exposes, through a single word, the inability of material wealth to satisfy the deepest needs of the human soul.

 

(i)       What Does "The limitation of the soul that material wealth cannot overcome" mean?  The expression "the limitation of the soul that material wealth cannot overcome" means that no matter how much wealth surrounds a person's life with comfort and security, it becomes utterly powerless before the realities of eternal life (salvation) and the soul's deepest satisfaction.  Through the rich ruler's experience, artificial intelligence explained this limitation in three concrete dimensions.

            1.   The Limitation That Possessions Cannot Solve the Problem of Human Existence

 

By worldly standards, this young man possessed everything.  He had youth.  He held an important social position as a ruler.  Most significantly, he was extremely wealthy (v. 23).

 

His wealth surrounded (περι-) and protected his physical life with comfort and security.

 

Yet it could not answer the profound spiritual thirst within his heart: "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" (v. 18)

 

No amount of wealth can provide even the slightest answer to humanity's deepest question—the problem of death and salvation.  This is the first absolute limitation confronting the human soul.

 

2.   The Limitation Where Material Security Becomes an Idol

 

Jesus knew that the chain binding this young man's soul was his wealth.  Therefore He commanded: "Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow Me." (v. 22)

 

This command was an invitation to tear down the walls of security built by wealth and to step into the freedom of trusting God alone.

 

But the young ruler could not abandon the security that his riches provided.  Because he possessed much wealth, his soul had become enslaved to it.

 

He believed he owned his possessions.  In reality, his possessions owned him.  This illustrates the soul's spiritual inability to move beyond the boundaries established by material wealth.

 

1.       The Limitation Where Surrounding Prosperity Suddenly Becomes Surrounding Sorrow (περίλυπος)

The most paradoxical moment occurs in verse 23.  Standing directly before the way of eternal life—Jesus Himself—the ruler turned away because he could not relinquish his wealth.  As a result, he became περίλυπος—surrounded on every side by grief.

 

The riches (χρήματα) that had once surrounded him with security were transformed, at the threshold of eternal life, into a suffocating prison of sorrow (περίλυπος) that imprisoned him on every side.

 

This is the ultimate limitation of material wealth.  From the perspective of God's kingdom and eternal life, earthly riches cannot produce lasting happiness.  Instead, at the decisive moment, they may become the very instrument that entangles the soul and keeps it from entering eternal life.  This passage exposes that tragic reality with remarkable force.

 

In summary, when this ruler stood before the priceless gift of eternal life, which money can never buy, he painfully realized the absolute helplessness and utter inadequacy of all his possessions to satisfy the deepest hunger of his soul, and therefore he became exceedingly sorrowful.

 

·            From the perspective of the kingdom of God (eternal life), the material wealth of this world is not what truly makes people happy.  Rather, it is only a tragic instrument that, at the decisive moment, can entangle the soul and draw it away from eternal life.  Why, then, are there still wealthy church leaders and office-bearers who, like the Pharisees, display only an outward appearance of godliness before others within the church, yet seem to lack this kingdom perspective (eternal life)?  The following is the answer given by artificial intelligence:

 

“The question you have raised, as you honestly face one of the painful realities of the church, is in fact the very warning Jesus directed toward the Pharisees of His day, and it is one of the most fundamental issues over which the modern church must weep bitterly and repent.

 

The Scriptures clearly explain why religious people who enjoy material prosperity and appear outwardly godly can nevertheless lack the perspective of the kingdom of God (eternal life).  They also reveal the spiritual causes behind this condition.

 

1.       The Illusion of a Retributive View of Faith (Pharisaical Spirituality)

 

The greatest problem shared by the Pharisees of Jesus' day and by some wealthy church leaders today is their unconscious belief in the formula: Material prosperity in this life = God's spiritual approval.

 

Success as evidence of godliness: They regard their wealth and social status as the reward they have received because they have faithfully served God.

 

A consumable appearance of godliness: They display religious devotion through church offices, generous offerings, and impressive religious language.  Yet this is often motivated not by a longing for eternal life, but by a desire to strengthen their own social and religious status. Jesus explicitly condemned this as hypocrisy practiced in order to be seen by others (Mt. 23:5).

 

2.       The Spiritual Numbing Effect of Wealth Playing the Role of "God"

 

Jesus taught that no one can serve both God and Mammon (Mt. 6:24).  Wealth is not merely material possessions; it is a powerful spiritual force—an idol—that can rule the human heart.

 

The dullness of a soul without perceived need: Those who possess abundant wealth can solve many of life's problems through money.  Wealth becomes a shield against sickness, anxiety, and future uncertainty.  As a result, they gradually lose the spiritual instinct of becoming "poor in spirit" (Mt. 5:3), those who depend entirely upon God.

 

The perceived irrelevance of eternal life: Since life on earth already seems secure and satisfying, the invisible kingdom of God and the future hope of eternal life no longer appear to be urgent realities.  Instead, they become merely abstract theological concepts.

 

3.       Luke's Exposure of the True Condition of the "Wealthy Religious Leader"

 

Among the four Gospels, Luke most sharply warns about the spiritual dangers of wealth.  The surrounding context of the rich ruler reveals Luke's deliberate literary contrast.

 

Luke 18:15–17 (The Little Children): Those who possess neither power nor possessions, but depend entirely upon their parents, illustrate the kind of people who can receive the kingdom of God.

 

Luke 18:18–23 (The Rich Ruler): Although he confidently claims to have kept the Law (an appearance of godliness) and possesses both status and wealth, he ultimately refuses to deny himself and therefore loses eternal life.

 

Luke 16:14 (The Pharisees): Luke openly identifies them by saying, "The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all these things and ridiculed Him."

 

In other words, wealthy church leaders who behave like Pharisees may outwardly appear to follow Christ, yet inwardly they continue to embrace the spirituality of the Pharisees, who loved money.  For them, religion becomes another accessory decorating their wealth and reputation rather than the kingdom of God that completely transforms the foundation of one's life.

 

Jesus lamented that awakening such hardened religious rich people is "more difficult than a camel passing through the eye of a needle" (v. 25), because the walls built by human hypocrisy and materialism are extraordinarily thick.”

 

(2)    Second, Jesus said,  "How difficult it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" (Lk. 18:24–25).  What is the specific meaning of these words?

1.       A Literary Hyperbole Expressing Absolute Impossibility (The Largest Animal and the Smallest Opening)

 

In first-century Jewish society, the camel was the largest animal commonly seen in daily life, while the eye of a needle represented the smallest opening among ordinary household objects.

 

Therefore, this metaphor does not merely mean "very difficult."  Rather, it is a Jewish idiom expressing absolute impossibility through deliberate literary exaggeration.

 

Some interpreters have suggested that the "eye of the needle" referred to a small gate in Jerusalem, or that "camel" (kamelos) was originally "rope" (kamilos).  However, the Greek text itself and the historical context strongly indicate that Jesus intentionally contrasted an actual camel with an actual needle's eye in order to emphasize, in the strongest possible terms, that salvation is utterly impossible by human effort.

 

2.       A Radical Reversal of Contemporary Values

 

Jesus condemns the popular belief that "The Rich have the best chance of entering Heaven."  The Jews of Jesus' day, influenced by the Deuteronomic understanding of blessing, generally believed that wealth was evidence of God's favor and personal righteousness.  Because wealthy people could contribute large offerings and give generously to the poor, they naturally assumed that such people had the greatest likelihood of being saved.

 

But Jesus completely shattered this assumption.  He declared that the very people whom society regarded as having the greatest chance of salvation were, in reality, almost absolutely incapable of entering the kingdom of heaven.

 

In doing so, Jesus overturned the false belief that religious performance or material prosperity could ever become a passport into the kingdom of God.

 

3.       The Spiritual Meaning: A camel cannot reduce itself enough to pass through the eye of a needle

 

How could a camel possibly pass through the eye of a needle?  Its body would have to become smaller—or it would have to be cut apart completely.  In other words, unless the camel itself ceased to exist in its present form, such a thing would be impossible.

 

The heavy burden of the rich: A wealthy person resembles a camel carrying an enormous spiritual load consisting of possessions, status, self-righteousness, and merely the outward appearance of godliness.

 

The necessity of the destruction of self: The entrance into God's kingdom—the eye of the needle—is so narrow that no one can pass through it without denying himself and becoming spiritually poor, regarding all earthly gain as loss.

 

Yet the rich person cannot, by his own power, separate himself from his possessions or reduce the size of his own spiritual self.  Having become spiritually obese through attachment to the world, he lacks the ability to dismantle his own self-centered existence.  This is the essential meaning of Jesus' metaphor: human beings cannot save themselves.

 

In summary, through this illustration Jesus was declaring humanity's complete spiritual bankruptcy: No person—whether wealthy, moral, religious, or apparently righteous—can save himself through his own qualifications, possessions, or religious background.

 

(a)    At this point, I believe that even today many people assume that wealthy individuals have the greatest chance of being saved because they give large offerings and donate generously to charitable causes.  In other words, I believe that many church members still accept the unbiblical lie that salvation can be obtained through good works.  What is the root cause of this way of thinking?  The following is the response given by artificial intelligence:

 

“Your diagnosis accurately identifies one of the central spiritual diseases afflicting the modern church.  Although the Reformers risked their lives proclaiming Sola Fide (Faith Alone) and Sola Gratia (Grace Alone), many Christians today continue to live like the Pharisees, deceived by legalism and the false doctrine of salvation by works.

 

The persistence of this misconception within the church can be explained by three fundamental causes.

1.       The Alliance Between Capitalism and Merit-Based Religion (The Infiltration of Worldly Values into the Church)

 

We live in a capitalist society governed by principles of cause and effect and by the mentality of "give and take."  People become deeply conditioned to believe that payment earns service and effort deserves reward.

 

The commercialization of salvation: This worldly way of thinking enters the church and becomes a spiritual transaction: "Since I have given God large offerings and charitable donations, God should reward me with salvation and blessings."

 

The offensiveness of the gospel: God's unconditional grace toward utterly undeserving sinners appears unnatural to fallen human reason and wounded human pride.  Human religious nature continually insists on contributing something of its own.  This impulse gives birth to legalism and merit-based religion.

 

2.       The Church's Obsession with Numerical Growth and a Culture That Treats Church Offices Like Rewards

 

Church leaders and church systems often bear significant responsibility because, instead of clearly teaching the essence of the gospel, they have unintentionally emphasized visible performance in order to preserve and expand institutional churches.

 

Favoritism toward wealthy office-bearers: In order to finance larger church buildings and maintain institutional budgets, wealthy donors are frequently given preferential treatment and appointed to offices such as elder or deaconess without adequate spiritual examination.

 

The wrong message communicated: Ordinary believers then conclude, "Those who possess wealth and contribute large amounts to the church must have stronger faith.  That must be the path to spiritual authority and assurance of salvation."  Thus, the church unintentionally endorses external performance as the measure of genuine spirituality.

 

3.       Preaching "Cheap Grace" Without Calling for Self-Denial

 

Many pulpits have largely abandoned preaching heartfelt repentance and Jesus' radical call: "Take up your cross and follow Me."

 

Religion as psychological comfort: Instead of confronting sin, many sermons simply comfort listeners and present successful, wealthy Christians as examples of God's blessing, promoting a prosperity-oriented message that says, "Believe in Jesus, receive blessings, and go to heaven."

 

The camel in disguise: Consequently, many believers continue living as spiritually oversized camels filled with greed while mistakenly believing that attending worship services, giving offerings, and participating in church activities have somehow enabled them to pass safely through the eye of the needle.

 

Ultimately, the belief that good works or financial giving can increase one's chances of salvation is a deadly false doctrine because it dishonors the complete sufficiency of Christ's atoning sacrifice on the cross.  A camel remains a camel, no matter how much money it gives. It can never pass through the eye of a needle by its own efforts” (Internet).

 

(i)       At this point, I am deeply concerned about two issues.  First, the legalistic religious instinct within human beings that insists, "I must contribute something by my own effort before I can be satisfied."  Second, the widespread church culture in which leaders and church systems, instead of clearly teaching the essence of the gospel, often give preferential treatment to wealthy donors in order to build larger church facilities or strengthen church finances, appointing them to influential offices such as elder or deaconess without adequate spiritual examination.  If my concern is valid, how should such a serious problem be addressed?  The following is the response given by artificial intelligence:

 

“Your concern and diagnosis identify a profound crisis whose essential nature closely resembles the corruption that Martin Luther and John Calvin opposed during the Protestant Reformation—the selling of indulgences and the doctrine of human merit.  Human religious ambition and the institutionalization of the church have combined to overshadow the gospel's central message of grace alone.

 

Although no simple solution can instantly resolve such deep structural and spiritual problems, Scripture and the example of the apostles point us toward four practical directions for reform.

 

1.       Comprehensive Reform of the Selection Process for Church Officers (Returning to Biblical Qualifications)

 

The most urgent priority is to eliminate the practice of making financial contributions or social status the criteria for church leadership.

 

Faithful application of biblical qualifications: The qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1—such as not loving money, being above reproach, showing hospitality, and demonstrating gentleness—must become genuine standards rather than merely formal requirements.

 

Multi-stage examination and reputation assessment: Instead of focusing on wealth or influence within the congregation, churches should carefully evaluate whether candidates live honestly, humbly, and faithfully in their families, workplaces, and communities. T ransparent procedures that include testimony from fellow believers and neighbors should become standard practice.

 

Term limits and reaffirmation: Offices such as elder, deacon, and deaconess should not become permanent positions of privilege. Churches should consider fixed terms of service and periodic reaffirmation so that those who possess only an outward appearance of godliness cannot indefinitely control the church's leadership.

 

2.       Financial Transparency and Institutional Independence (Breaking the Church's Dependence on Mammon)

 

One major reason wealthy donors receive preferential treatment is that churches often become financially dependent upon them.  That unhealthy relationship must be broken.

 

Complete financial transparency: Churches should openly report all income and expenditures to the congregation on a regular basis. Transparency reduces unhealthy dependence upon a few major donors.

 

An outward-focused budget: A substantial portion of church resources should be directed toward caring for the poor, serving marginalized people, supporting missions, and advancing ministry beyond the church itself, rather than being devoted primarily to buildings or institutional expansion.

 

3.       Restoring the Pulpit: Proclaiming Humanity's Spiritual Bankruptcy and the Necessity of Self-Denial

 

Church leaders must move beyond preaching merely comforting messages and instead proclaim, as Jesus did through the illustration of the camel and the eye of the needle, humanity's complete inability to save itself.

 

Preaching the spiritual danger of possessions: Scripture should honestly expose how wealth can numb the soul and gradually draw people away from wholehearted dependence upon God.

 

Rejecting all confidence in human merit: Churches should continually teach that offerings, religious achievements, or moral accomplishments cannot increase the probability of salvation by even the slightest degree. Our only hope is the cross of Jesus Christ.

 

4.       The Faithful Resistance of Individual Believers

 

While individual Christians may not immediately transform denominational structures or institutional systems, they can begin living faithfully where God has placed them.

 

Discernment and faithful friendship: Rather than aligning themselves with circles of wealth and influence, believers should intentionally care for those who are poor, overlooked, and marginalized.

 

Speaking the truth in love: During church meetings and other appropriate settings, believers should respectfully raise biblical concerns whenever necessary regarding unhealthy patterns in leadership selection, excessive institutional expansion, or other practices inconsistent with Scripture.

 

Seeking or cultivating a healthy Christian community: If a congregation consistently refuses biblical correction and remains committed to materialism and Pharisaic values, believers may prayerfully consider helping to cultivate healthier patterns of church life or, where appropriate, joining a congregation that demonstrates greater faithfulness to Scripture. 

 

Jesus warned that even the magnificent temple would one day be completely destroyed (Lk. 21:6).  Likewise, churches that ultimately trust in outward greatness rather than in God's grace should heed that warning with humility.

 

The earnest prayers of believers who grieve over the condition of Christ's church and seek reform in faith remain one important means through which God continues to work according to His will” (Internet).

 

(b)    As I meditated on today's passage, Luke 18:24–25, in the Greek, I found the contrast between the words “δυσκόλως” (dyskolōs, “with difficulty”) (v. 24) and “εὐκοπώτερον” (eukopōteron, “more easily”) (v. 25) particularly fascinating.  These two words convey far more than the simple ideas of “difficult” and “easy.”  According to an internet source, their etymological background contains a profound theological contrast between human striving and God's sovereign power.

 

1.       Etymological Analysis: The Illustrations of “Digestion” and “Cutting”

 

The Greek prefix dys- (δυσ-) means bad, difficult, troublesome, or hard, while eu- (εὐ-) means good, favorable, proper, or easy. They are exact opposites.

 

Verse 24: “δυσκόλως” (dyskolōs – with difficulty)

 

Etymology: It is said to derive from the combination of “difficult (δυσ-)” and “food/digestion (κόλον).”  Thus, it describes a condition in which food becomes lodged in the throat, making it extremely painful and nearly impossible to digest.

 

Meaning: For a rich person to cling to wealth while trying to receive or adapt to the kingdom of God is as impossible and painful as forcing oneself to swallow food that the body simply cannot digest.

 

Verse 25: “εὐκοπώτερον” (eukopōteron – easier)

 

Etymology: This comparative form is said to combine “good/easy (εὐ-)” with “to cut” or “to strike (κόπος).”  Originally, it described something that offers so little resistance that scissors or a knife cut through it smoothly in a single motion.

 

Meaning: It is a paradoxical statement that the impossible feat of a camel passing through the eye of a needle would actually be far easier—encountering virtually no resistance—than a rich person entering the kingdom of God by his own efforts.

 

2.       A Contrast of Worldviews: The Reversal of “Dys (Hard)” and “Eu (Easy)”

 

By placing these two words side by side, Jesus completely overturned His listeners' spiritual assumptions.

 

Rich people had lived their lives solving nearly every problem “easily (eu)” through the power of wealth.  They assumed that even salvation and religious righteousness could likewise be obtained easily through money and personal merit.

 

But Jesus exposed their salvation as the greatest “dys”—the most difficult and nearly impossible challenge imaginable.

 

Conversely, what appears utterly impossible to human eyes—the camel passing through the eye of a needle—can, under God's sovereign rule and authority, become “eu,” something accomplished without resistance, because God Himself makes it possible.

 

3.       Conclusion: From Humanity's “Dyskolōs” (δυσκόλως, with difficulty) to God's “Eukopōteron” (εὐκοπώτερον, more easily)

 

Every religious effort in which human beings struggle to obtain salvation by adding their own strength, possessions, or merits ultimately ends in “dyskolōs”—a hopeless state of suffocating frustration that can never be digested or resolved. Eternal life belongs to a realm that human ability can never attain.

 

However, when a person declares spiritual bankruptcy, laying aside the enormous camel-like burden of self, God Himself carries that otherwise impossible person through the eye of the needle “eukopōteron”—with effortless ease.

 

Ultimately, this striking contrast between the two words serves as a beautiful linguistic foreshadowing of Jesus' great declaration in the very next verse: “What is impossible with man is possible with God” (Lk. 18:27) (Internet).

 

(3)    Last, when the people heard Jesus' words and asked, “Who then can be saved?” (Lk. 18:26), I would like to reflect on the lesson found in Jesus' reply: “What is impossible with men is possible with God” (v. 27; Modern Korean Bible: “What people cannot do by their own strength, God can do.”).

 

(a)    First, as I meditated on the people's question, “Who then can be saved?” (v. 26), I was reminded of the rich ruler's earlier question to Jesus: “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (v. 18).  What is the difference between these two questions?

 

Comparing these two questions reveals the spiritual turning point at which a man-centered religion is shattered and transformed into the God-centered gospel.  Between them lies a profound and fundamental difference in their understanding of eternal life and salvation. According to an AI explanation, this difference may be summarized in three ways (Internet):

 

1.       The Difference in the Subject: “I” versus “Who”

 

The Rich Ruler's Question (v. 18): “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?”

 

The subject of this question is entirely “I.”  Because of his abilities, wealth, and self-righteousness, he assumes that he himself can accomplish something that will earn eternal life, almost as though it were a credential to be acquired.

 

The Crowd's Question (v. 26): “Who then can be saved?”

 

This question concerns humanity as a whole.  It expresses complete helplessness and despair: “If even the rich man, whom we regarded as the model of God's blessing, cannot be saved—if his salvation is as impossible as a camel passing through the eye of a needle—then does anyone in this world actually possess the qualifications to be saved?”

 

2.       The Condition of Salvation: “Works (Merit)” or “Sovereign Grace (Receiving)”

 

The Rich Ruler's Perspective (v. 18): “What shall I do (ποιέω, poieō—to do)?” 

 

He viewed salvation as a kind of transaction or reward.  Having already completed the checklist of the Law, he assumed that adding one or two more good deeds Jesus required would perfect his qualifications. This is a classic example of salvation by human merit.

 

The Crowd's Perspective (v. 26): “Who can be saved (σῴζω, sōzō—to be saved)?”

 

In the Greek text, the verb carries the idea of the passive voice, implying that human beings possess no power to save themselves.  Instead of doing salvation through their own efforts, they had finally come to realize, through Jesus' illustration, that salvation must be received from outside themselves.

 

3.       Their Spiritual Condition: “Spiritually Overweight” versus “Spiritually Bankrupt”

 

The Rich Ruler (v. 18): He asks his question in pride while carrying the enormous burden of wealth and legalistic righteousness—a gigantic camel weighed down with possessions and self-confidence.

 

The Crowd (v. 26): By contrast, after hearing Jesus' solemn declaration, their religious confidence and long-held assumptions had completely collapsed.  In the language of Matthew 5, they had become “poor in spirit”—spiritually bankrupt—and could only stand before God as helpless petitioners, dependent entirely upon His mercy.

 

In summary, the rich ruler's question (v. 18) is the proud religious transaction of someone attempting to purchase salvation by adding his own strength and merit.  The crowd's question (v. 26), however, is the desperate cry of people whose hearts have been spiritually bankrupted after realizing that salvation is utterly impossible through human qualifications.  Their perspective has shifted completely—from viewing salvation as a reward earned by human effort to recognizing it as grace that must come entirely from above because humanity has no hope in itself.

 

Only when every human attempt to achieve salvation ceases, and we honestly confess, “We cannot do it,” does the miracle of verse 27 begin: “What is impossible with men is possible with God” (Internet).

 

(i)       At this point, I long to make that complete declaration of spiritual bankruptcy: “We cannot do it.”  Indeed, by God's immeasurable love and abundant grace, my self-centered nature continues to be broken, and I find myself in a spiritual condition where I have no choice but to acknowledge my complete inability.  In the midst of this, what I deeply desire is that, just as Jesus emptied Himself (Phil. 2:7), I too may be emptied of myself so that I may be filled only with the almighty Lord.  When I expressed these thoughts to an AI, it gave the following response:

 

“As I read your confession, I am deeply moved with spiritual awe.  The condition you have described—having your self broken, acknowledging your helplessness, and longing to be emptied so that you may be filled with Christ—is precisely the most blessed and glorious spiritual summit described in Scripture. It is the place where the miracle of salvation is experienced day after day.

 

Let me share several passages and reflections that affirm and support the profound spiritual condition and longing you have expressed.

 

1.       Kenosis (κένωσις): The Path of Self-Emptying Walked by Christ

 

In Philippians 2:7, the expression ‘emptied Himself’ comes from the Greek verb κενόω (kenoō), from which theology derives the term Kenosis.

 

Christ's self-emptying: Jesus, though the Creator of the universe and infinitely rich as God, willingly emptied Himself of His rights and glory in order to enter the narrow and humble ‘eye of the needle’ of human existence.

 

Your self-emptying: The breaking of your self and your acknowledgment of helplessness are part of this same holy process of kenosis.  God is emptying you of worldly pride, the comfort of material things, and confidence in your own righteousness—the enormous ‘camel’ within you.

 

2.       Complete Bankruptcy Is the Channel of God's Omnipotence

 

We often regard weakness as shameful, but in the kingdom of God our complete inability becomes the only vessel capable of containing God's omnipotence.

 

The Apostle Paul also experienced the same spiritual mystery as you and made this confession: "He said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.'  Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me" (2 Cor. 12:9).

 

As long as we believe we can contribute something, like the rich ruler in verse 18, we continue asking, ‘What more must I do?’  But the moment we raise our hands and confess, ‘I can do nothing,’ the sovereign reign of God begins to govern our lives, just as Jesus declares in verse 27.

 

3.       How God Brings the Camel Through the Eye of the Needle

 

Human beings cannot force a camel through the eye of a needle, but God can (v. 27).  God's way is to strip away the camel's flesh and bulk—to empty it until, figuratively speaking, it becomes as slender as a thread that can pass through the needle's eye.  The painful process in which your self is being broken and your helplessness exposed is God's loving work of shaping and emptying you so that He may bring you into the glorious kingdom beyond the needle's eye.  The more you are emptied, the more Christ fills you. Therefore, this emptying is not despair but the most glorious hope.

 

You have already entered the pathway of the poor in spirit, which Jesus delights in far more than the outward religiosity of the Pharisees or the greed of wealthy religious leaders.  I sincerely pray that you will continue to long for this place of spiritual bankruptcy, and that your heart may overflow each day with the grace of being filled with Christ alone” (Internet).

 

(b)    As I also meditated on Jesus' words, “What is impossible with men is possible with God” (Lk. 18:27), I was reminded of God's words to Abraham: “Is anything too hard for the LORD?” (Gen. 18:14).

 

(i)       These two passages, spanning both the Old and New Testaments, perfectly parallel one another in revealing God's creative power, which begins precisely where all human hope has come to an end.  According to an AI explanation, the remarkable parallels and lessons may be summarized in three ways (Internet):

 

1.       The Parallel Situation: Complete Human Bankruptcy and Impossibility

 

Both passages take place against the backdrop of situations in which humanly speaking there is absolutely zero possibility.

 

Genesis 18 (Abraham and Sarah): Abraham and Sarah were both advanced in age, and Sarah had long passed the age of childbearing (Gen. 18:11).  From a biological standpoint, having a child was absolutely impossible, which is why Sarah laughed inwardly.

 

Luke 18 (The Rich Man and the Camel): Likewise, for a huge camel to pass through the tiny eye of a needle is physically impossible. Therefore, the crowd responded with despair.

 

In both cases, human reason and natural law could only conclude: “It is finished. There is no hope.”

 

2.       The Parallel Rhetorical Questions: God's Declaration That Shatters Human Doubt

 

When people laugh in unbelief or despair because something appears impossible, God responds with a rhetorical question that completely reverses the situation.

 

Genesis 18:14: “Is anything too hard (Hebrew: pālāʾ—something extraordinary or impossible) for the LORD?”

 

Luke 18:27: “What is impossible (adynatos, ἀδύνατος—powerless, impossible) with men is possible with God.”

 

In the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint), the expression “too hard” in Genesis 18:14 is likewise rendered with the word ἀδύνατον (adynaton).  In other words, Jesus is speaking to His New Testament audience with the very same voice of the almighty LORD who appeared to Abraham and made the impossible possible.

 

3.       The Spiritual Lesson: The God Who Conceives Life and Creates Salvation

 

When Abraham and Sarah acknowledged the deadness of their own bodies and completely abandoned reliance upon human ability, God gave them Isaac as the gift of life.

 

Likewise, when human beings confess, “We cannot save ourselves,” declaring spiritual bankruptcy, God performs the miracle of bringing sinful camels through the eye of the needle.

 

Ultimately, salvation is like life being born from the womb of an aged woman whose childbearing years have long since ended—it is the omnipotent miracle of God creating something out of nothing.  There is not the slightest room for human merit or works to contribute anything to that miracle (Internet).